GREENBELT, Md. — Can a Maryland County ban companies from using fuel gas and oil appliances while completing future construction projects?
A Federal District Court judge in Maryland thinks so, ruling in favor of Montgomery County, against the National Association of Home Builders and other independent business associations.
Now the U.S. Department of Justice is getting involved calling the County's policies "radical" and "unlawful."
"Radical efforts by local officials to undermine American energy dominance must be stopped," said U.S. Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate on X (formerly Twitter). "Montgomery County, Maryland’s ban on using fuel gas or fuel oil appliances in new construction is unlawful."
Shumate's remarks come as the DOJ looks to interject in the appeals process before the U.S. Fourth Circuit.
The DOJ suggests Montgomery County's policy conflicts with the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act which directs the Department of Energy, not local or state governments, to regulate what appliances meet energy conservation standards.
"Montgomery County’s Bill 13-22 bans the installation of certain products that meet federal standards, along with the infrastructure needed to use them, making them effectively unmarketable by manufacturers and unavailable to consumers," the DOJ notes in their Amicus Brief.
Essentially the bill mandates home and office heating, cooking and hot water systems to switch from gas to electricity. Grills, however, are exempted.
The County says its ultimate goal is to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2035 in hopes of improving the environment.
"Building sector accounts for half of the greenhouse gases in Montgomery County," according to the Sierra Club of Montgomery County. "The elimination of gas will improve indoor air quality since gas stoves emit toxic chemicals & are associated with significantly increased incidences of asthma among children."
The Montgomery County Republican Party, meanwhile, argues the change could cost tens-of-thousands to implement.
"If you live in a condo, this could result in a $75,000 special assessment per unit," they claim. "For people on a fixed income, this assessment could cause them to move, for apartment buildings, the cost of these upgrades will raise rents drastically, reducing the affordable housing stock in the County."
